Maybe, just maybe, if we stopped building telescopes like fragile porcelain dolls with glass heads that can't take a scratch and started building them like tanks that can take a beating..
>”Maybe, just maybe, if we stopped building telescopes like fragile porcelain dolls…”
It’s a pet peeve of mine but whenever I read “Maybe, just maybe” I instantly dislike whatever comes next. It’s an indicator that the post is sardonic and dramatically over simplified.
The real reason why the JWST is so delicate is because it’s a large satellite that had to be crammed into a tiny fairing. That means it has to be folded up like the worlds most intricate origami. All those moving parts, coupled with incredibly thin and weight saving components means that deploying it successfully is tremendously fraught with complexity. If we had a wider diameter rocket, JWST wouldn’t be nearly as complicated. But that simply wasn’t the case in 1997 when it was first designed.
Soon we might have an option to avoid the extreme mass and size restrictions caused by having to squeeze the JWT on top of Ariane 5 - if/when Starship proves viable, then we could probably cut the cost of the telescope development by an order of magnitude by being able to choose a reasonable tradeoff instead of sacrificing everything (complexity, cost, reliability) just to cut down some weight and size.
Its about balancing between the needed properties, strength and weight. Similar thing for airplanes, a minor collision can ground a plane but would be a non issue for a tank.
BuyMyBitcoins|4 years ago
It’s a pet peeve of mine but whenever I read “Maybe, just maybe” I instantly dislike whatever comes next. It’s an indicator that the post is sardonic and dramatically over simplified.
The real reason why the JWST is so delicate is because it’s a large satellite that had to be crammed into a tiny fairing. That means it has to be folded up like the worlds most intricate origami. All those moving parts, coupled with incredibly thin and weight saving components means that deploying it successfully is tremendously fraught with complexity. If we had a wider diameter rocket, JWST wouldn’t be nearly as complicated. But that simply wasn’t the case in 1997 when it was first designed.
hobs|4 years ago
PeterisP|4 years ago
hoseja|4 years ago
me_me_me|4 years ago
Have you considered what you are proposing?
They would have to send a spyglass if they made it rugged piece of technology not most advanced space telescope in history of humanity.
Any kind of extra shielding, extra rigidity takes away from the weight budget of the project.
deeblering4|4 years ago
patrick0d|4 years ago
HPsquared|4 years ago
https://youtu.be/aXQ2lO3ieBA
throwanem|4 years ago
throwanem|4 years ago